What is a Return
6100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. the article regulates the return to work procedure as the second part. The legislator has made this request 95. the article has been edited in the text. Although “a person who cannot perform a transaction within the time specified in the law or strictly determined by a judge for unavoidable reasons may request a return to work. “If the same result to be achieved by an action that cannot be carried out in a timely manner can also be achieved by another legal means other than returning to work, the necessity of this way to be the last resort is determined definitively by the provision”. the job cannot be returned.”
If the necessary action is not taken within the periods accepted by law, the right based on that action will disappear. However, with the regulation introduced for exceptional cases, it is aimed to prevent non-existent reasons from leading to loss of rights.
Istanbul BAM 28. Law Department, 05.06.2020 date and 2019/1753 E., 2020/819 K. “The reasoned decision of the court was notified to the defendant’s lawyer on 30/04/2019 and the defendant’s lawyer filed a petition for the dismissal of the case. filing an objection on 15/05/2019, that is, after 2 weeks have elapsed since the notification, but by submitting the rest report dated 14/05/2019 with the second petition submitted by the defendant’s lawyer on 16/05/2019, for her daughter K2, who was diagnosed with acute nasopharyngitis by Pediatrician K1 of Maslak X1 Hospital / 05/2019, on 13/05/2019 due to her daughter’s sudden illness according to the prepared petition, the transaction that took place on 14/05/2019 can only be carried out on 15/05/2019 for reasons that are not yet available, that this is understood from the information on the X2 account screen; CMK 95.
and while it is requested that the requests for return to work are accepted within the scope of the continuation articles and the examination of the applications for appeal on the basis, CMK 95/1. If he takes action within the period specified in the law or determined by the judge, he may request a return to work.
” in the form and coinciding with the last day of the appeal application, as of 14/05/2019, it was understood that the defendant’s attorney’s request for reinstatement to work would be evaluated on the spot, the appeal application would have to be evaluated on the basis, because the doctor’s report on the defendant’s daughter’s illness was submitted by the defendant’s lawyer.” It has been accepted that the appeal application, which cannot be made in time for the extradition request, should be deemed to have been made in time if a valid reason is presented and the application should be evaluated on its merits.
CMK’s 96. in the article, “It is mandatory to request a return to work within two weeks from the elimination of the obstacle that caused the procedure not to be performed on time.” by introducing the provision, a time limit has been imposed for the return to work application. Istanbul BAM 9. Law Office 10.12.2020 date and 2020/2076 E., 2020/4107 K. in his numbered decision, “The case is related to the claim for compensation. The Court of First Instance decided to dismiss the case.
The plaintiff appealed this decision on 24/06/2020. With its Oct. decision dated 07/09/2020, the Court decided to reject the request for appeal due to the fact that the decision and judgment fee specified in the minutes were not deposited within the legal period. It was seen that the additional decision was appealed by the plaintiff’s lawyer with a petition dated October 06, 2020 with a request for reinstatement to work. 95, which regulates the return to work request and review authority of CMK numbered 6100. in the event that the necessary action cannot be taken due to non-existent reasons within the period specified in the law or strictly determined by the judge, 96.
in the article, the request for a return to work will be made within 2 weeks from the elimination of the obstacle that caused the return to be unable to be made during the period, 97. in the article, it is stipulated that the extradition request is based on the Request for reinstatement to work, and their evidence and symptoms will be shown in the petition for reinstatement to work, and if the right to apply for the right of appeal is granted in Article 98/2, the reinstatement to work will be requested from the Regional Court of Justice. It’s lost.
In a concrete case; the Oct. decision of the local court dated 07/09/2020 was notified to the plaintiff’s attorney on 13/09/2020; The plaintiff’s lawyer applied for a return to work, claiming that the appeal period was missed for unavoidable reasons due to the positive Covid-19 test of one of the office employees and the quarantine of their offices.
According to the test result included in the petition Oct, it is understood that the office employee’s test result on 09/09/2020 was positive. The quarantine period of the Ministry of Health on the specified date is 14 days and will expire on 24/09/2020. In this case, the CMK’s 96. in accordance with the article, the plaintiff’s lawyer requested a return to work on 02/11/2020 after a 2-week period from 24/09/2020, when the obstacle disappeared, and the request for a return to work did not arrive on time.
For the reasons explained, it has been decided to reject the plaintiff’s attorney’s request for reinstatement to work and therefore the application for appeal, which is not in its due date, in accordance with Article CMK 352/1-C.” As can be seen from the decision of the District Court of Justice, the necessary action must be taken within two weeks of the elimination of the concrete situation that prevents the transaction. The obligation to prove the start and end dates of the reason that does not exist belongs to the claimant.
In the second paragraph, “It is possible to request a return to work in first instance and appeal cases until a final decision is made at the latest. However, if the finalized decision is made in the absence of one of the parties, a request for reinstatement to work may be filed for missed periods during the investigation phase, even after the decision has been made.” The second paragraph determines the stage of trial at which a request for reinstatement to work can be made. The right to request extradition may also be exercised after the final judgment has been rendered, provided that the judgment has been rendered in the absence of the party who wishes to exercise this right.
Article 97 “Extradition is requested with a petition. The grounds on which the request is based and the evidence or symptoms related to it are indicated in the petition. The transaction, which cannot be performed within the time limit, must be performed within the specified time period in order to request a return to work.” with the text determining the formal elements of the application. 98. the article regulates by which authority the return to work requests will be examined.
“The resumption of the incomplete transaction is requested from the court that will review this transaction. In case of loss of the right of appeal, extradition is requested from the district court of justice, and in case of loss of the right of appeal, from the Supreme Court.” In the case of the proceedings heard in the Local Court, if the transaction cannot be fulfilled for a non-existent reason, the court hearing the case will consider the request for reinstatement to work. If a judicial remedy is applied, the judicial authority that has lost the right to apply to which judicial remedy will evaluate the request.
The extradition request does not require postponement of the trial and does not prevent the execution of the sentence. However, if the court examining the request considers the request justified, it may decide to postpone the trial or postpone the execution of the sentence, provided that the guarantee is shown. If deemed necessary, the court may also decide to postpone the trial without showing collateral or to postpone the execution of the sentence.
The costs incurred due to the refund request are collected from the requesting party. However, if the other party makes an unfounded objection to the return to work request and causes the costs to increase, the judge may decide that all or part of the costs will be charged to the other party.
You can reach our other article samples and petition samples by clicking here.